Guess what folks? Oil is trading at about $111 to $112 per barrel and gas prices are down. Oil prices are down from the mid to high 140s per barrel range we saw in July. That is more than a $30 per barrel drop in one month and nobody had to do the Jackie Speier 55 MPH crawl for oil prices to drop. Note to J. Speier: That's because (and I'm being generous when I say this) going 55 MPH has almost nothing to do with $140 per barrel oil. $140 per barrel oil is the product of commodity speculation in the commodity futures trading pits.

Today's buzz word is demand destruction. Earlier this year, May (2008), I wrote an article in another one of my publications about oil's downside. In this May 22, 2008 article titled, OIL PRICES HAVE A HUGE DOWNSIDE. HOWEVER, I COULD BE WRONG, I wrote:

"Here's the case for oil prices caving in. More supply, more conservation, accelerated mainstreaming of alternative energy technologies, and a slower economy."

The factors mentioned in the previous sentence result in demand destruction for oil and lower oil/gas prices. In an August 12th Reuters article titled, "Biggest drop in U.S. oil demand in 26 years", it was reported that the Energy Information Administration (EIA) stated that U.S. oil demand during the first half of 2008 fell by an average 800,000 barrels per day (bpd) compared with the same period a year ago. This represented the biggest volume decline in 26 years. The article also stated that the EIA projected significantly lower oil consumption based on prospects for a weaker economy.

That being said, commodity markets are forward looking. Therefore, oil speculators are covering their short positions and otherwise being less aggressive on the short side as news about the US economy seems to get worse with each passing day. Simply stated, if consumers have less money to spend there is less demand for oil. Actually it is more complicated than that but you get the general idea.

However, before you go out and start buying put option contracts on USO or DIG, you should understand that oil prices are not based on logic; they are the product of fear, greed, and speculation. As such, oil prices can shoot up to $225 a barrel if open warfare between Iran and Israel erupts in the MIddle East or they can fall to the $60 or $70 or lower per barrel range if there is a depression.

Oil prices will continue to fall in direct response to a worsening international economy. The headline in my June 19th, 2008 Beacon article was titled, "ROYAL BANK OF SCOTLAND'S CHIEF CREDIT STRATEGIST WARNS, "A VERY NASTY PERIOD IS SOON TO BE UPON US, BE PREPARED". As the Bank of Scotland correctly predicted, from an economic standpoint, things have gotten worse.

FNM and FRE are on the the verge of total collapse and a government takeover that will totally destroy all stockholder equity in the companies. And now, we have Professor Kenneth Rogoff, a leading academic economist and former chief economist for the International Monetary Fund, saying that it is highly likely there will be a high profile casualty among the US banks.

Professor Rogoff is not talking about some tiny bank in west Mississippi here. He's talking about a huge money center bank with thousands of branches spread across the world, billions upon billions of dollars in assets, and hundreds of thousands of customers. A banking collapse of this size would threaten the FDIC fund and possibly lead to a run on banks. In addition, there would be a domino effect as smaller companies, that depend upon the business of the huge bank for most of their revenues, go out of business when the bank collapses. This is not a pretty picture.

However, the scenario described in the previous paragraph could bring oil prices down below $100, 90, 80, 70, 60, 50............ as things unwind. Too bad hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions of people will be financially wiped out in order to get these lower oil prices.

Oil pricing is pure evil. The price of oil will skyrocket if there is a major catastrophe like a war in the Middle East and the price of oil will plummet if there is a major catastrophe like a financial meltdown. Either way, you're screwed.

Back in my younger days when I worked at SOHIO on the financial end of the Prudhoe Bay oilfield project as a staff accountant accounting for assets and allocating costs between the oil company partners in the project, I read a book published in 1929 titled, "Oil and Peace". The book was dedicated "To the memory of John Simeon Shepherd, a man of peace and Charles Edward Reed, a man of oil". That is one of the most subtle, nasty dedications I have ever read.

Oil and gold are the things that drive men mad, start wars, build and destroy nations.

Oh, and if you were looking for some advice on how to play oil prices; think straddle.  ]]> http://www.sanbrunobeacon.com/2008/08/bills_take_on_oil_and_gas_pric.html http://www.sanbrunobeacon.com/2008/08/bills_take_on_oil_and_gas_pric.html Tue, 19 Aug 2008 13:05:16 +0000 By Bill Baker, J.D.
Editor and Publisher, The San Bruno Beacon

I thought I would try something new this week because most news is just plain old bad and, well, it's Summer. Can't think of a better reason, so the Summer reason will have to do.

Sometimes I receive, what could best be described as "interesting" e-mail messages from "interesting" people. I usually have a good laugh and move on to the next e-mail message. Here's an example of the type of "interesting" stuff I receive and some of my observations:

In a series of somewhat incoherent, stream of consciousness e-mail rants, an excited person, who obviously reads the BEACON, said they were convinced that the Beacon was not a newspaper and spent a lot of time arguing that the Beacon was a "blog". They went on to argue that I used J.D. after my name and I was not an attorney and that they had searched through Martindale (an attorney guide) and couldn't find me. They said they were wasting electrons and talked about "recycling the circular rolls". They also didn't like the way I used apostrophes. Finally, they did not like the way I treated the oil and gas issue in one of my articles and made it quite clear that that they knew what they were talking about because they had a "degree in economics and an MBA from one of the top 3 schools in the Country" (I suppose they meant the U.S.). They said they had spent 15+ years studying it (whatever "it" is).

Let's discuss the BEACON issue. If this BEACON reader would have taken the time to read the header for THE SAN BRUNO BEACON they would have found that it says, "THE SAN BRUNO BEACON. news and commentary since 1995". That being said, THE SAN BRUNO BEACON is a well established, widely read internet publication. The word "newspaper" does not appear in the BEACON header and the word "blog" does not appear in the BEACON header. THE SAN BRUNO BEACON was online before the word "blog" came into mainstream use. So, whether you call the BEACON a blog, online newspaper, paper, etc. it really doesn't matter because the BEACON has already been called just about every name in the book during the past 13 years. No matter what you want to call the BEACON, it does not change what this publication does or how it delivers its message. I like to think of the BEACON as an "online publication".

Arguments about semantics (i.e., deciding what to call an online publication) will do little to change the reality that in less than 10 years most hard copy daily newspapers will no longer exist and publications such as the BEACON will thrive in a publishing environment that will create a more diversified, democratic, less controlled methodology for delivering all points of view. Technology and economics no longer support the hard copy newspaper business model. The days of the narrow, controlled, status quo supporting hard copy newspaper; whose views were, and in many cases, still are, controlled and largely paid for by advertisers, are quickly coming to an end. Online, there is really no such thing as a traditional newspaper. In essence, all news publications presented on the internet are rough equivalents of each other. As a matter of fact, many blogs are superior to the migrating, transitional hard copy newspapers they compete against for readership.

During an interview today, Dan Colarusso, the former city editor for The New York Post, stated that the only way the newspaper industry can save itself is by, "beginning an aggressive transition to the Web". I rest my case.

With respect to my using the letters, J.D. after my name; the letters J.D. mean that I hold a "juris doctor" degree. A law degree that I received from the University of San Francisco School of Law. No, I do not practice law. Never said I did. Therefore, you won't find my name in the Martindale-Hubbell Directory of Lawyers. Some people don't like the fact that I use the letters J.D. after my name, some people don't care, and some people think it's ok. I worked for and earned my law degree so I'm going to put the letters after my name. I am not the only person with a law degree who puts the letters J.D. after their name. For those of you who are fixated on these two letters after my name, as I know a few of you are, here's some advice, "relax, take a staycation and enjoy the scenery".

As far as all the other issues brought up by this reader are concerned; thanks for the comments about apostrophes, got it covered; I'm right about the oil and gas situation; I'm glad this person has a good education (everybody should); recycling is good; and not wasting is good. Have I missed anything? No. Ok, let's move on.   ]]> http://www.sanbrunobeacon.com/2008/07/email_grab_bag.html http://www.sanbrunobeacon.com/2008/07/email_grab_bag.html Thu, 31 Jul 2008 05:32:09 +0000 By Bill Baker, J.D.
Editor and Publisher, The San Bruno Beacon

In 1995, when I started The San Bruno Beacon, the internet was young and the technology for creating an online newspaper was limited. Before there were blogs, before there was Google, and before almost any major newspaper publication was online, The San Bruno Beacon began its online presence.

Whether you agree or disagree with me, I appreciate the fact that you take the time from your busy day to read the Beacon.  ]]> http://www.sanbrunobeacon.com/2008/07/the_best_part_about_writing_th.html http://www.sanbrunobeacon.com/2008/07/the_best_part_about_writing_th.html Thu, 31 Jul 2008 01:34:39 +0000 By Bill Baker, J.D.
Editor and Publisher, The San Bruno Beacon

Let me start by saying that one of the main reasons the United States has so many problems is that voters continue to elect tax and waste, all sizzle and no steak politicans like Speier to higher levels of public office. During her years as a California State Legislator, Speier was instrumental in creating California's Budget disaster that we are now suffering through. Now, with all of the problems facing the United States, that require real solutions, the best that Speier can come up with is legislation to lower the National speed limit to 60 mph for freeways in urban areas and 65 mph in less populated areas.

It is quite clear that Speier does not understand the economic mechanisms driving the prices of oil and gasoline. The price of oil or gasoline will not go down based on how fast or slow people drive their vehicles in the United States.

Speier's limited understanding of finance and economics does not allow her to understand that the price of oil is being driven by increasing demand for petro based products in countries like India, China, Brazil, and Russia. In these countries, their growing middle class is now able to buy more vehicles and use more products requiring oil based energy and their hyper-active industries are devouring oil based resources to crank out more products.

In addition, the escalating price of gasoline, in the United States, is also the result of static US oil refining capacity resulting from the inability of oil refiners to open new refineries; ever increasing taxes on gas; and the fact that oil companies cannot drill for oil in oil rich areas of the United States.

The fact is that stringent environmental regulations coupled with modern oil exploration and development technology have now progressed to the point where oil resources can be developed without destroying the environment and refineries can be built that won't lay waste to the environment. However, luddites like Speier, who are stuck in the 1970s, don't realize this and are still against expanding the oil and gas exploration and development infrastructure in the United States for "environmental reasons".

If Speier really wanted to bring down oil prices and make transportation affordable for working people, then she would support increased oil and natural gas exploration and development and the building of more oil refineries. Otherwise, it won't be long before we may be paying $10 per gallon for gas. Of course, Speier doesn't care how much gas costs because she's a "let them eat cake" limousine liberal, multi, multi millionaire Hillsborough socialite who could afford $10, $25, $50 per gallon gas.

We need to increase oil exploration, oil development, refining capacity, and renewable resource technology.

However, because we have politicians like Speier, who are obviously still living in the 1970s (when national speed limit legislation was originally proposed) we can't move forward with energy independence programs that will significantly lower the price of oil so the US economy can grow its way out of our current economic problems. As far as gas taxes are concerned, you can thank tax and waste politicians like Speier for jacking up these taxes.

Speier and her non substantive side show solutions to the real problems facing the United States hurt you and your family.  ]]> http://www.sanbrunobeacon.com/2008/07/jackie_speier_queen_of_junk_le.html http://www.sanbrunobeacon.com/2008/07/jackie_speier_queen_of_junk_le.html Mon, 21 Jul 2008 08:00:54 +0000 By Bill Baker, J.D.
Editor and Publisher, The San Bruno Beacon

Let me start by saying that racism in any form is not acceptable and it is illegal. Racism is not made acceptable or legal by denying that racist activity is not racist activity. Racism is not made acceptable by attempting to disguise a racist organization as anything else than what it is. Racism is not a joke and it is not a dirty little secret; it is morally reprehensible and, once again, illegal.

Any governmental entity, at any level, that condones, tolerates, or actively participates in racism is engaging in morally reprehensible and, once again, illegal activity. For any governmental entity, there should not even be the hint of impropriety when it comes to racism.

The Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) was founded in 1971 as a small civil rights law firm. Over the years, it has grown into an internationally recognized organization that, in the words of the SPLC site:

".....fights all forms of discrimination and works to protect society's most vulnerable members".

One branch of the SPLC is the SPLC Intelligence Project (SPLCIP). The SPLCIP:

"monitors hate groups and tracks extremist activity throughout the U.S. It provides comprehensive updates to law enforcement, the media and the public through its quarterly magazine, Intelligence Report. Staff members regularly conduct training sessions for police, schools, and civil rights and community groups, and they often serve as experts at hearings and conferences".

The SPLCIP has identified 125 Active White Nationalist U.S. Hate Groups. 5 of these groups are located in California. One of these groups that has been identified by the SPLCIP, the European American Issues Forum, is, according to the SPLCIP web site, located in San Bruno.

Here's what the SPLC says about these groups it has identified as White Nationalist hate groups:

"White nationalist groups espouse white supremacist or white separatist ideologies, often focusing on the alleged inferiority of nonwhites. Groups listed in a variety of other categories - Ku Klux Klan, neo-Confederate, neo-Nazi, racist skinhead, and Christian Identity - could also be fairly described as white nationalist. The groups .... range from those that use racial slurs and issue calls for violence to others that present themselves as serious, non-violent organizations and employ the language of academia. For many years, the largest white nationalist group in America has been the Council of Conservative Citizens, a reincarnation of the old White Citizens Councils that were formed to resist desegregation in the 1950s and 1960s."

There are approximately 30,000 cities in the United States. What is it about the City of San Bruno that makes it one of the very few cities (125/30000 or .00416%) in the United States to be specifically identified, by the SPLCIP, as the home of what the SPLCIP identifies as an active white nationalist U.S. Hate Group?

Does anybody in San Bruno's City Government care about having San Bruno identified by the SPLCIP as the home of a White Nationalist hate group? Has San Bruno's City Council, City Manager or anybody in San Bruno's Police Department talked with the SPLC about this disturbing information?

If the European American Issues Forum believes that the SPLC's characterization of their organization is incorrect, they should clarify this matter with the SPLC.

The bottom line is that the SPLC has identified the City of San Bruno as the home of an organization that the SPLC has identified as a White Nationalist hate group.

San Bruno's City Government needs to start a dialogue with its residents about racism in our community. Because San Bruno has been identified by the SPLC as the home of an active White Nationalist U.S. hate group, our City Government needs to have a heightened awareness of racist activity in San Bruno and engage in proactive efforts to prevent the growth of racism in our community.

Racism, in any disguise, is something that we cannot ignore, accept, or embrace.   ]]> http://www.sanbrunobeacon.com/2008/07/san_bruno_the_city_with_a_hear_1.html http://www.sanbrunobeacon.com/2008/07/san_bruno_the_city_with_a_hear_1.html Thu, 03 Jul 2008 00:52:04 +0000 By Bill Baker, J.D.
Editor and Publisher, The San Bruno Beacon

As an investor, I have to see things coming long before they happen. The equity markets are forward looking instruments and to be successful you need to act on information long before a crowd gathers around a targeted equity and destroys the potential profit in any position you may want to build. When it comes to taking advice, you learn who the winners and losers are.

That being said, I have a very high degree of confidence in the economic research team at the Royal Bank of Scotland. Simply stated, when it comes to economic matters, these are the folks you want to listen to.

In a 06/18/2008 Telegraph story, it was reported that Bob Janjuah, the chief credit strategist for the Royal Bank of Scotland warned clients that:

"A very nasty period is soon to be upon us - be prepared"

Mr. Janjuah believes that a serious crash in the global stock and credit markets is looming just over the horizon.

Mr. Janjuah went on to say, "Cash is the key safe haven. This is about not losing your money, and not losing your job"

While I agree with Mr. Janjuah that cash is the key "safe haven" I would also point out that the anticipated volatility in credit and equity markets creates a need to hedge risk with derivatives and find other stores of value. In a word; diversify.

However, the point of this article is not to discuss investment strategies but to heed the warning of these three paragraphs included in this Telegraph article:

"US Federal Reserve and the European Central Bank both face a Hobson's choice as workers start to lose their jobs in earnest and lenders cut off credit.

The authorities cannot respond with easy money because oil and food costs continue to push headline inflation to levels that are unsettling the markets. The ugly spoiler is that we may need to see much lower global growth in order to get lower inflation.

The Fed is in panic mode. The massive credibility chasms down which the Fed and maybe even the ECB will plummet when they fail to hike rates in the face of higher inflation will combine to give us a big sell-off in risky assets."

From a local perspective, I would strongly urge both the City of San Bruno and the San Bruno Park School District to immediately put their financial houses in order, create budget surpluses, and build strong cash positions.

We may be heading into an economic depression. Pay close attention to coming economic developments as they unfold. This is not about politics, this is about survival.  ]]> http://www.sanbrunobeacon.com/2008/06/royal_bank_of_scotland_analyst.html http://www.sanbrunobeacon.com/2008/06/royal_bank_of_scotland_analyst.html Thu, 19 Jun 2008 03:52:35 +0000 By Bill Baker, J.D.
Editor and Publisher, The San Bruno Beacon

The San Bruno Park School District (SBPSD) Board of Trustees was going to put a parcel tax measure on the November 2008 election ballot. However, knowing that they had a snowball's chance in Hell of passing a parcel tax, during a high turnout Presidential Election year, the San Bruno Park School District (SBPSD) Board of Trustees decided to fold up their tents and try their luck in a low turnout March 2009 election. This laughable move on their part shows that this Board is dysfunctional, has no credibility, and a weak almost nonexistent case for a parcel tax.

This parcel tax, that the SBPSD Board is too dysfunctional and afraid to put on the November Ballot, is nothing more than an attempt by them and their Superintendent to pay for their collective mismanagement of SBPSD funds and assets.

The SBPSD Board of Trustees is trying to sneak this ridiculous, burdensome tax past San Bruno's voters in a low turnout March election.

Instead of spending their time scheming to find new ways to bleed more money out of San Bruno's residents, the SBPSD Board of Trustees and Superintendent should be spending all of their time using the large amounts of taxpayer money, that they already have, to provide our children with a focused, quality education.

In a June 12th Daily Journal article, SBPSD Board Member Russ Hanley stated that he suggested the March tax election date, that was approved by the Board, so that the SBPSD Board could "rally" parents and SBPSD staff. In other words, the SBPSD Board plans to use SBPSD public schools as campaign central for their tax campaign.

Before Mr. Hanley and his Board colleagues start using SBPSD school property, staff, and/or taxpayer money to promote their tax campaign, I would strongly suggest that they consult with their attorney.

Undoubtedly, the campaign for this tax scheme will result in disrupting the educations of the children who attend the SBPSD as these children are dragged into the tax campaign. The children whom the SBPSD is supposed to be educating will have a harder time focusing on their school work as this tax campaign drags on consuming the time and resources of the SBPSD. To add insult to injury, the mismanagement of school funds and assets will continue even as this Board and Superintendent attempt to bleed more money out of San Bruno's residents.

Poor planning and mismanagement of SBPSD funds and assets, by the SBPSD Board of Trustees and Superintendent Hutt, have created the mountain of problems that the SBPSD is dealing with today. These people are not going to suddenly change, get smarter, or receive some divine inspiration or revelation that will make them better at their job; they are going to keep making the same mistakes over, and over, and over again. No matter how much money you give these people, things will never get better as long as they control the SBPSD.  ]]> http://www.sanbrunobeacon.com/2008/06/san_bruno_park_school_district_2.html http://www.sanbrunobeacon.com/2008/06/san_bruno_park_school_district_2.html Wed, 18 Jun 2008 14:10:31 +0000 By Bill Baker, J.D.
Editor and Publisher, The San Bruno Beacon

Barry Marchessault, a San Bruno resident and Beacon reader, sent me a copy of a letter, addressed to him, that he received in the mail from Pastor Daniel Krajicek. Pastor Krajicek is the Pastor at the Crossroads Christian Center (an Assemblies of God Church).

According to the letter Barry received, Pastor Krajicek doesn't want the Buddhists to open a Buddhist Temple near the Crossroads Christian Center where Krajicek is the "Pastor".

In his letter, Pastor Krajicek uses the word "Regrettably" when referring to the Buddhist's plan to open their facilities to the public 24 hours per day every day for those who desire to pray, meditate, and chant. [I guess God only works the 9-5 shift and Sunday services so we can't have any 24x7 praying, meditation, or chanting]. The Pastor's letter also states that they (the Buddhists) plan to hold Temple services at the same time on Sunday mornings as his AOG Church and St. Bruno's Catholic Church and that this will cause a parking problem [I don't think Krajicek's "no parking, no Buddhists" argument will pass Constitutional muster].

Pastor Krajicek's letter also states, in part:

"...If you agree that allowing another religious institution in an already congested area is not in the best interest of our neighborhood, and don't want people freely coming and going throughout the night, you must let your concerns be heard."

In the part of his letter that appears in the previous paragraph, Pastor Krajicek is saying that his neighborhood isn't big enough for the Buddhists to share with the Catholics and Krajicek's Crossroads sect. In my opinion, Krajicek's statement is the same as posting "Buddhists not welcome signs" up and down the street where his Christian sect is located. Pastor Krajicek also states in his letter that he doesn't want "people freely coming and going [to the proposed Buddhist Temple] throughout the night". Really? And just how does Krajicek think he is going to stop people from going to their Temple throughout the night to practice their religion?

Pastor Krajicek's Assemblies of God USA (AOG) Church, a "Protestant fellowship", exists in part because it is protected under the First Amendment to the Constitution allowing the free exercise of religion. Does Krajicek not think that these same rights under the Constitution, that allow his Church to exist, apply to the Buddhists who want to open their Temple near his church?

If Pastor Krajicek doesn't think that different religions can exist in close proximity to each other, he should take a little trip to Brotherhood Way in San Francisco.

As far as other religions are concerned, the official position of Krajicek's Assemblies of God Church is that they do not accept non-Christian religions as valid means of salvation and access to God. As a matter of fact, the Assemblies of God Church has published the following statement as part of their position on religious toleration:

".............the Assemblies of God disavows universalism and the toleration of worldviews that do not require entering the kingdom of God through the narrow gate of the God-man, Jesus Christ."

So, at Assemblies of God churches, like Krajicek's Crossroads Christian Center, it appears that there is no toleration of Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, Judaism, Confucianism, Taoism, Shintoism, Sikhism, Zoroastrianism, etc. Oy vey

Let me conclude by saying that even if Pastor Krajicek and the Assemblies of God folks "disavow the toleration of worldviews that do not require entering the Kingdom of God through the narrow gate of the God-man, Jesus Christ"; there are other Christians, like me, who do believe in the toleration and understanding of all religions.

I hope that the AOGers will seek and find a path that will lead them to a higher level of compassion for and understanding of their fellow human beings with whom they share the world we all live in. A world in which bigotry, hate, violence, and other injustice carried out in the name of religion needs to disappear before it destroys us.  ]]> http://www.sanbrunobeacon.com/2008/06/san_bruno_assemblies_of_god_pa_1.html http://www.sanbrunobeacon.com/2008/06/san_bruno_assemblies_of_god_pa_1.html Mon, 16 Jun 2008 18:04:01 +0000 By Bill Baker, J.D.
Editor and Publisher, The San Bruno Beacon

Money won't solve the problems infecting the San Bruno Park School District. The problem lies with the SBPSD Board of Trustees and the Superintendent they refuse to fire.

Two Members of the SBPSD Board of Trustees, Henderson and Hanley, have been taking up space on the Board and causing problems for the SBPSD for several decades. They need to go. These two people have had decades to provide solutions to the problems we have been and are now facing in the SBPSD. As evidenced by the current state of affairs in the SBPSD they have not only done nothing to solve the SBPSD's problems, but have created even more problems for the SBPSD and the students it serves. We need some creative, well educated, hard working people to occupy the SBPSD Board seats currently being occupied by these two.

During these very hard economic times, most families in San Bruno have to live on a tighter budget. To do this, families cut back on their spending and learn to live on the money they have available to them. However, the SBPSD doesn't think that the laws of economics apply to them. The SBPSD Board of Trustees and Superintendent see San Bruno's taxpayers as suckers they can fool into providing them with an endless supply of money to pay for their incompetence and waste.

As evidenced by the defeat of the ridiculous Measure F tax scheme last year, San Bruno's taxpayers want off the sucker list of never ending taxes used to pay for wasteful spending, government incompetence, fat government employee paychecks, benefits, and lifetime retirement and medical plans paid for at taxpayer expense.

To save the SBPSD from more waste and mismanagement, it is imperative that every San Bruno resident vote against the parcel tax being put on the November 2008 ballot by the SBPSD Board of Trustees. We must hold these people personally accountable for the money they are wasting on this tax measure and also consider filing a taxpayer lawsuit against the appropriate parties for, what in my opinion is, their grossly negligent mismanagement of SBPSD taxpayer money and assets; making sure that they pay for their legal defense out of their own pockets.

If the San Bruno Park School District wants to balance their budget, here's a suggestion: cut costs and stop wasting money.   ]]> http://www.sanbrunobeacon.com/2008/06/san_bruno_park_school_district_1.html http://www.sanbrunobeacon.com/2008/06/san_bruno_park_school_district_1.html Sat, 07 Jun 2008 12:04:14 +0000 By Bill Baker, J.D.
Editor and Publisher, The San Bruno Beacon

My prayers and condolences go out to the family of Rebeca Medrano who recently lost her life after being involved in an accident in San Bruno, with a van, while riding her bicycle. By all accounts I have read, Rebeca was a wonderful young lady with a very promising future. God rest her soul.

The most horrible, unthinkable tragedy that a parent can experience is the loss of a child. For those of us who are parents, we do everything that is humanly possible to protect our children from danger. The recent tragic death of this promising young student from Parkside Intermediate School reminds all of us how precious the lives of our children are and how we must work to protect them.

According to the San Bruno Police, Rebeca Medrano was traveling east on Niles Avenue when she hit the vehicle traveling south on Oak Avenue. San Bruno Police Commander Matt Campi told San Mateo County Times reporter Neil Gonzales, "It looks to be an unfortunate accident. The driver of the van was operating the vehicle in the proper manner. She (Rebeca) started to go downhill and started accelerating. She went through an intersection and ran smack into the van." When this San Mateo County Times article was published on 05/19/2008, no charges had been filed against the driver of the van.

8 words: defective road construction / improper and-or nonexistent signage. Because the inherently dangerous Niles Ave./Oak Ave. T intersection is located 1 block away from St. Roberts Elementary School and approximately 3-4 blocks away from Parkside Intermediate School, extra signage and other precautions should have and need to be put in place by the City of San Bruno to warn and protect the large number of children who travel through this intersection.

Is it possible that the City of San Bruno may be comparatively or even strictly liable for this horrible accident because the City of San Bruno failed to properly engineer and/or maintain the streets where this accident occurred and/or put proper signage on the streets? Here are some questions that need to be answered:

1). What was the condition of the roadway at the time the accident occurred?
2). What types of traffic control signs were posted on Niles and Oak Avenues and, if signs were posted, where were these signs posted and were the right signs posted in the right places?
3). What is the accident history for these streets and the Niles/Oak intersection where the accident occurred?
4). Did the City of San Bruno provide traffic signs that would warn a young person using the street about the potential danger at this intersection?
5). Was the engineering of the intersection and the streets inherently dangerous?

These are just a few of the questions that need to be asked and answered so that tragic accidents like this one can be prevented in the future.

Another way to help prevent this type of tragedy from happening again is for SBPSD Superintendent Hutt to have pamphlets printed up that provide detailed information about bicycle and traffic safety. These pamphlets should be distributed to all students in the SBPSD. In addition, the City of San Bruno should use its "FOCUS" publication to provide San Bruno residents with information about traffic safety in San Bruno and warn San Bruno residents about which streets and intersections in San Bruno pose the greatest risk to pedestrians and bicycle riders.

The tragic accident discussed above is not the only pedestrian/bicycle fatality that has occurred in San Bruno this year. Earlier this year, a woman was killed at the intersection of San Bruno and Easton Avenue when she was struck by a car and killed. The Easton Avenue intersection, where this woman was killed, has been the scene of numerous accidents. What has been done by the City of San Bruno to make this traffic intersection safer?

We best serve the memories of the two deceased people mentioned in this article by calling upon the City of San Bruno to make our streets safer for pedestrians and bicycle riders through better engineering and public information campaigns. To do anything less would be an open invitation to future tragedies.  ]]> http://www.sanbrunobeacon.com/2008/05/tragic_death_of_parkside_inter.html http://www.sanbrunobeacon.com/2008/05/tragic_death_of_parkside_inter.html Mon, 26 May 2008 07:05:13 +0000 By Bill Baker, J.D.
Editor and Publisher, The San Bruno Beacon

The San Bruno Park School District Board of Trustees and Superintendent want to put a ridiculous, regressive property tax measure on the November 2008 Election Ballot.

If the problems with K-12 education in California could be solved with money, they would have already been solved. According to the California Department of Education, for fiscal year 2007/2008, the total funding (Federal, State, local, lottery, etc.) for grades K-12 in the State of California was approximately $68.554 billion ($68,554,800,000). Let's put this huge number in perspective. The total Budget for the US Department of Defense for 2007 was approximately $461.7 billion. On a per capita basis, the amount of money spent on California's K-12 public school system dwarfs the total U.S. military budget.

In return for the hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars that have been poured into California's K-12 public education system during the past 10 years, we now have one of the most problematic, lower ranking K-12 public education systems in the industrialized world. Only 65% of California's high school students graduate on time (if at all) with a regular high school diploma. That's dismal.

Punishing San Bruno's residents with higher taxes is not economically feasible. In 2000 the price of oil was less than $40 per barrel. Today, oil sells for about $126 per barrel. This has resulted in retail gas prices approaching the $4.30 per gallon mark. Today, 1 out of every 204 households in California is in some stage of foreclosure. Food prices are skyrocketing. PG&E bills are soaring.

Families with household incomes of hundreds of thousands of dollars per year are relatively immune to these higher prices. Families with household incomes of less than $150,000 per year are being hit hard by these escalating prices. Families with household incomes of less than $70,000 per year are teetering on the edge of financial ruin as prices for food, clothing, transportation, and other necessities of life soar.

With this in mind you have to ask yourself what type of delusional, mean spirited people would propose and support a parcel tax that will directly increase taxes on homeowners, and indirectly increase rents on renters, who are already being punished with escalating prices and buried in debt? The San Bruno Park School District Board of Trustees and Superintendent pushing this ill fated parcel tax are acting like tax fanatics because they don't care how many tens of thousands of your taxpayer dollars they have to squander to put this parcel tax measure on the November 2008 ballot or how many families they destroy with their taxes. They want you to pay for what I think is their incompetence, mismanagement, and outright stupidity with as many of your tax dollars as they can suck out of you no matter how much it costs you and your family and regardless of the damaging consequences these taxes have on you and your family.

The SBPSD Board of Trustees and the SBPSD Superintendent don't care that thousands of San Bruno's homeowners and renters are suffering extreme financial hardship. Many San Bruno renters and homeowners are teetering on the edge of personal financial tragedy. Adding yet another parcel tax to the massive tax burden that San Bruno's homeowners and renters are already bearing is like pouring water on a sinking passenger ship so it will sink faster and kill more people.

That being said, let's talk about regressive taxes such as the parcel tax that the San Bruno Park School District (SBPSD) Board of Trustees and their Superintendent want to ram down voters throats in the November 2008 election.

Whether you own or rent your residence in San Bruno, your cost of living will go up if this unfair parcel tax scheme being planned is approved by voters in November 2008. In other words, you will have less money to spend on your family and your children. Yes, even if you rent your residence you will pay more rent because the costs of the parcel tax will be passed on to you, by your landlord, in the form of higher rent.

In a nutshell:

Regressive taxes reduce the tax incidence of people with higher ability-to-pay, as they shift the incidence disproportionately to those with lower ability-to-pay. In other words, people earning more money pay a lower percentage of their income for a fixed tax. Regressive taxes are "Robin Hood in Reverse" taxes; a form of taking from lower income groups to benefit upper income groups.

The median family income in San Bruno is somewhere around $70,000+ per year. Therefore, there are a significant number of families living in San Bruno with annual incomes that are much less than $70,000 per year. For these families, higher property taxes or rents resulting from increasing property taxes represent a significant financial burden. When you factor in the higher costs of living, mentioned in the previous paragraphs, San Bruno residents living below the median income level will suffer a lot of financial pain when these parcel taxes strip away what little money they have to support their families.

The cumulative effect of these cancerous parcel taxes is that they destroy the financial resources of middle and lower income families. These parcel taxes are like a growing parasite or cancer that kills families by draining their financial resources to the point where they die a financial death. When these taxes destroy families, the people most impacted are the children who have to learn to live without adequate medical care, food, clothing, and shelter as they relocate to a new and often poorer school district that does not have tens of millions of dollars in its bank account like the San Bruno Park School District. With all of the property taxes being piled on homeowners and passed on to renters, in the form of higher rent, it is no surprise that fewer than half of families in California can afford the basics of housing, child care, food, health insurance and transportation.

As the political campaign for this parcel tax develops, the San Bruno Park School District Board of Trustees and their supporters will engage in non-substantive, deceptive rhetoric, that distracts from the real issues, by saying that this parcel tax is for the children, the children are our future, the children need this, etc. This deceptive blather is like an oil company saying they are environmentalists after one of their tankers spills a few hundred thousand gallons of oil into the ocean.

The fact of the matter is that if the SBPSD Board of Trustees and Superintendent really cared about our children they wouldn't allow the SBPSD to become distracted by numerous scandals that have made this Board the laughing-stock of school boards in the SF Bay Area; they would not mismanage the taxpayer money that has already been entrusted to them; they would subject the SBPSD to an independent forensic audit to ferret out the root of the District's financial control problems; and the Board would hire a Superintendent who could bring substantive change to the SBPSD that would improve the lives of the children in the SBPSD.

Finally, you do not improve the lives of children by burying their families with tax after tax after tax to the point where they cannot afford to survive. Severe financial problems are more often than not the root of domestic violence, alcohol and drug abuse, as well as other dysfunctional behavior that leads to many of the horrific family tragedies that we read about in the newspapers.  ]]> http://www.sanbrunobeacon.com/2008/05/regressive_unfair_property_tax.html http://www.sanbrunobeacon.com/2008/05/regressive_unfair_property_tax.html Mon, 19 May 2008 08:03:41 +0000 By Bill Baker, J.D.
Editor and Publisher, The San Bruno Beacon

If you want more bad government; a bigger financial crisis in California; a politician with embarrassingly poor judgment; and painfully high taxes that will melt your income like an ice cube sitting in Death Valley; then vote for Jerry Hill.

When it comes to politics, I think Jerry Hill is one of the bad guys. His political instincts appear to override his common sense. Case in point; last year, San Mateo County Sheriff Greg Munks was rounded up by law enforcement authorities while visiting an illegal Las Vegas whorehouse with his undersheriff. In his capacity as a San Mateo County Supervisor, Hill did not take any official action to open up the Munks' problem to public scrutiny or make any changes in government to insure that this type of conduct would be neither condoned nor tolerated in the future. Instead, Hill appeared to minimalize the seriousness of the Sheriff's whorehouse visit in what appears to be an attempt to put this matter behind Munks. In effect, I think Hill gave Munks a free pass on the whorehouse visit. It appears that in return for what in my opinion was his enabling behavior and help, Hill received a lavish fundraiser at the Woodside estate of Sheriff Greg Munks. Munks also gave Jerry Hill about $4,700 for Mr. Hill's campaign. Hill later returned the money Munks gave to him when the heat started coming down on Hill for not taking any action regarding Munks' visit to the illegal Nevada whorehouse. Big deal, how much money do you think Hill scored from all of the other attendees at the campaign party Munks hosted for Hill at Munks' Woodside estate? Debt paid?

However, Jerry Hill is more than just a professional politician who helps and is supported by a Sheriff who was caught and released by law enforcement authorities when he visited an illegal whorehouse in Nevada. Jerry is also a Member of the San Mateo County Board of Supervisors who has presided over and contributed to the County's budget disaster that has resulted in the County of San Mateo living on financial life support as it tries to bridge a budget gap of approximately $25 million while Hill keeps finding more ways to put the County deeper in debt. Hill is another one of those reckless politicians who spends, spends, and spends and when the money runs out finds new and creative ways to suck more money out of taxpayers with more taxes. Hill is a typical, irresponsible tax and spend politician. Hill's motto could be "better living through punishing taxation". That works if you don't happen to be one of the people targeted by a chronic taxer like Hill.

If you don't think Hill is a bad news candidate then judge him by the company he keeps. A brochure supporting Hill was recently mailed to San Bruno voters with the ridiculous headline, "San Bruno Supports Jerry Hill". The brochure supporting Hill's candidacy was signed by all 5 San Bruno's City Council Members in their capacity as City Council Members. This is the same financial wrecking crew that tried to destroy San Bruno's tax base last year with their failed Measure F tax scheme and is leading San Bruno down the road to bankruptcy. Indeed, birds of a feather do flock together. I rest my case.

On the other hand, if you want to vote for a decent person who graduated from Capuchino High School in San Bruno, got her degree in Business (with a focus on finance and economics) from the University of California, and worked as a Deputy Attorney General for the State of California then Gina Papan should be your choice for the California State Assembly in the June 3rd Democratic Primary. Papan's candidacy offers voters a candidate with a lifetime of ethical, focused, common sense legal, political, and financial experience.

Gina Papan would make an excellent Member of the California State Assembly.  ]]> http://www.sanbrunobeacon.com/2008/05/gina_papan_for_state_assembly.html http://www.sanbrunobeacon.com/2008/05/gina_papan_for_state_assembly.html Wed, 14 May 2008 00:54:43 +0000 By Bill Baker, J.D.
Editor and Publisher, The San Bruno Beacon

At their Wednesday, May 14, 2008 Board Meeting, the San Bruno Park School District (SBPSD) Board of Trustees is going to try to ram yet another parcel tax down the throats of San Bruno's residents in the November 2008 Election. This at a time when housing prices are crashing, the economy is in a recession, and gas prices are well above $4 per gallon.

You can bet that the people behind this parcel tax scheme will start printing brochures and other propaganda filled with pictures of children that talk about how the children are our future, our children need your money, etc. Unfortunately, the tax load on many of the parents of these very same children is going to be so great that, combined with their mortgage and all of their other bills, these children's parents may lose their homes and not be able to send their kids to the very same school district that is causing them to lose their home. So maybe we can print up brochures and pamphlets with children standing in front of a house with a "foreclosed sign" on the lawn? Is that the type of future we are taking about for our children and their families?

Last year, San Bruno's sales tax revenue based was threatened by the City's reckless Measure F tax scheme that would have raised your sales taxes, destroyed local businesses, and driven consumers out of San Bruno. We fought Measure F, we won. This year, the San Bruno Park School District (SBPSD) Board of Trustees is threatening to increase the financial pain on you and your family by spending your tax dollars against you in an attempt to raise your property taxes with yet another SBPSD school district parcel tax. Look at your property tax bill and you will see how you are being buried in school district property taxes by the San Bruno Park Elementary School District, the San Mateo Union High School District, and the San Mateo Junior College District. The financial problems associated with skyrocketing property taxes exacerbate the weak financial position of many families and this leads to other serious and potentially dangerous social problems. To add insult to injury, much of this taxpayer money being handed over to these School Districts is being squandered and misspent.

The accounting controls at the SBPSD are so bad that the SBPSD has paid out money to Members of the San Bruno Park School District (SBPSD) Board of Trustees when these people were not entitled to the money the District paid to them. This payout scandal went on for several years while this money was drained out of the District's Treasury. Now, San Bruno Park School District Superintendent David Hutt refuses to subject the SBPSD to a thorough audits of the District's internal financial and accounting controls.

Yet, SBPSD Superintendent Hutt is running around trying to sue one of the former SBPSD Board Members who isn't paying back SBPSD money that Hutt wrongfully paid out to him in the form of insurance premiums for several years. With all of the problems that Hutt has created for the SBPSD, you would think he would spend more of his time acting like a Superintendent instead of playing the part of an ineffective bill collector.

Can you imagine passing a parcel tax so this guy Hutt will have even more of your tax dollars to play with?

But this is just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to problems at the SBPSD. Not unlike the City of San Bruno, the SBPSD requires new management and some new elected officials who will not squander the taxpayer money they are given, learn how to make necessary cuts, and live within their budget just like every one of San Bruno's residents must do when they budget for their family's expenses.

Bleeding San Bruno's taxpayers with yet another parcel tax to pay for the incompetence and mistakes of the SBPSD Board of Trustees and Superintendent will not bring better education to San Bruno. It will only encourage more fiscal irresponsibility from this group that has proven themselves incapable of making prudent financial decisions that will benefit the children of San Bruno.  ]]> http://www.sanbrunobeacon.com/2008/05/fiscally_irresponsible_san_bru.html http://www.sanbrunobeacon.com/2008/05/fiscally_irresponsible_san_bru.html Tue, 13 May 2008 08:26:26 +0000 By Bill Baker, J.D.
Editor and Publisher, The San Bruno Beacon

In my opinion, the City of San Bruno is dying a painful financial death because of the reckless and grossly negligent decisions made by San Bruno's City Council and Manager.

Four out of five Members of the San Bruno City Council have been on the Council for more than 12 years. The fifth one has been there for about 3 years parroting the bad decisions of his Council cronies. They talk about their experience during elections. Their experience consists of trashing the City of San Bruno's finances, drowning the City in debt, and leading San Bruno down the road to bankruptcy. You could say that the San Bruno City Council is a financial wrecking crew.

Connie Jackson was appointed as San Bruno's City Manager in 2003. Until this year, Jackson's pitiful 5 year tenure as San Bruno's City Manager has been plagued by chronic annual budget deficits in the $500,000 per year range. Now, the City of San Bruno is projecting an annual budget deficit of approximately $1.5 million per year. It seems that the longer Jackson is San Bruno's City Manager, the worse things get for San Bruno's residents and their City.

I think it is now embarrassingly clear that San Bruno City Manager Connie Jackson needs to resign or be fired. It takes three Council votes to fire Jackson. As I see it, the Council probably won't fire her because she will make an easy scapegoat for them if the City finally goes bankrupt. That being said, the fact remains that it is not only Jackson's fault that San Bruno is walking down the road to bankruptcy; both the City Council and Jackson will share the blame and responsibility for San Bruno's financial demise as the political, financial, and legal curtains come crashing down on them.

To save San Bruno, the current Members of the San Bruno City Council need to resign or be recalled at the earliest possible convenience of San Bruno's voters. Their decisions have resulted in skyrocketing rates and fees on City sponsored services accompanied by rich salaries, benefits, and retirement plans for San Bruno's senior Management employees. This City Council has handed out millions of San Bruno taxpayer dollars to pay for the Redevelopment scheme they hatched. When is this money going to be paid back and exactly who received all of these millions of taxpayer dollars? To add insult to injury, San Bruno's City Manager has personally borrowed what may be hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars to finance her personal home. She refuses to disclose exactly how much money she borrowed and what the terms of this loan are.

The real estate interests profiting from Redevelopment and City Manager Connie Jackson feed on the taxpayer dollars that belong to San Bruno's residents. San Bruno's residents pay to support the money being fed to these people. In return for this generosity, San Bruno's residents get punished with higher rates, fees, and taxes.

City Manager Jackson and this Council almost destroyed San Bruno's tax revenue base last year by attempting to increase San Bruno's City Sales Tax with their Measure F scheme that was rejected by voters and on which they may have spent as much as $300,000 in San Bruno taxpayer money. Measure F was a reckless, amateurish move that would have destroyed many San Bruno businesses while driving others away from San Bruno. How are Jackson and the City Council planning on recovering this money that they wasted on Measure F? Perhaps the City Council and Jackson should reimburse the City for the cost of their failed Measure F scheme out of their own pockets? Now there's an idea that could help balance San Bruno's City Budget!

I have warned San Bruno's City Council and City Manager many times to cut City spending and turn the City's annual budget deficit into a budget surplus. They don't listen and the annual deficits get bigger. Education may be a factor in their inability to understand that their failed schemes are leading San Bruno into bankruptcy. Nobody on the San Bruno City Council has a Bachelor's level degree in finance or accounting. As a matter of fact, San Bruno now has a Mayor with little more than a high school diploma, so he can hardly be expected to understand the complexities of municipal finances. Maybe stupidity is a factor. Some of the stuff this Council does is painfully stupid and defies logic. Then again, maybe there is another reason for all of this anomalous behavior when it comes to the City's finances?

Whatever these Council Members lack in formal finance related education, they more than make up for in arrogance. In the complex arena of municipal finance; arrogance, ignorance, lack of formal education in the fields of finance and/or accounting, and outright stupidity are a recipe for financial death.

At its 05-07-2008 Meeting, the City of Vallejo City Council voted 7-0 to declare Chapter 9 Bankruptcy. Vallejo is now going bankrupt because the fools on the Vallejo City Council did exactly what the fools on the San Bruno City Council have been doing. They dug themselves into a hole during the past 10-20 years by caving in to almost every demand the public employee unions made for higher wages and benefits. Finally, when the proverbial well ran dry, the unions were left out in the cold when the City Council finally had no more money to feed the unions with.

If the Vallejo City Council really wanted to help union members they would have held the line on wages, benefits, and retirement plans during the past 10-20 years so that many of these very same union members promised higher wages and benefits would not have to lose their jobs now that there is no more money.

A salary/benefit increase doesn't do a union member much good if that union member loses their job as a result of the salary/benefit increase. Once again, arrogance, ignorance, and stupidity results in another disaster. This time union members and their families will suffer. Not unlike their union brothers in Vallejo who supported the City Council and Manager; many union members who work for the City of San Bruno and support San Bruno's current City Council and Manager will be paid back for this support by losing their jobs. Union contracts that an employer cannot support financially are not worth the paper they are written on. Bankruptcy proceedings can shred almost any contract.

San Bruno's City Council and Manager will continue to destroy San Bruno's financial future and inflict more financial punishment on every family in San Bruno in the form of never-ending rate and fee increases on City services until we replace them with competent people who have a workable plan to lower City spending and bring our City back from the brink of financial ruin.   ]]> http://www.sanbrunobeacon.com/2008/05/the_city_of_san_bruno_is_dying.html http://www.sanbrunobeacon.com/2008/05/the_city_of_san_bruno_is_dying.html Wed, 07 May 2008 14:23:12 +0000 By Bill Baker, J.D.
Editor and Publisher, The San Bruno Beacon

In one of the worst cases of engage brain before opening mouth stupidity I have seen in awhile, Jackie Speier (nicknamed the "the Poodle" by former California State Senator and San Mateo County Superior Court Judge Quentin Kopp) was booed by other Members of Congress as she gave her first speech in Congress. Speier is an all sizzle and no steak, loud mouth, do nothing politician. A fact that was quickly recognized by the Members of Congress who booed her.

In its April 11th story titled, "Speier's first House speech gets booed", the San Mateo Daily News squeezed Speier's Jonestown story into the article. The 30 year old Jonestown story has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that Speier was booed by other Members of Congress. However, the Jonestown story is the multipurpose political weapon/shield used by Speier and her supporters to deflect criticism, build sympathy and support, and distract attention from her shortcomings and failure as a legislator.

The Jonestown tragedy has been a recurring backdrop and theme in all of Speier's political campaigns. Haven't Speier and her political allies ridden the tragic Jonestown saga far enough? More than 900 people died at Jonestown. The never ending, ghoulish use of the macabre Jonestown ritualistic mass murder suicide story (by Speier and her political allies), as a sympathy ploy for building and maintaining political support for Speier, is both bizarre and unsettling. In my opinion, building a political career on the 900+ bloated, dead bodies of the victims of a ritualistic murder, suicide orgy of death is about as bizarre, macabre, and dysfunctional as politics gets.

Speier's already pathetic representation of the 12th Congressional District (that covers northern San Mateo County, parts of central San Mateo County, and southwestern portions of San Francisco), at a time when we need strong representation in Congress, does a great disservice to all residents of the 12th Congressional District.

Congressman Lantos was a tough, intelligent person of substance who had the respect of his peers. Now, we have Jackie Speier, the queen of histrionics and whining representing us in Congress.

We can, and hopefully will, do better.   ]]> http://www.sanbrunobeacon.com/2008/04/jackie_speier_already_an_embar.html http://www.sanbrunobeacon.com/2008/04/jackie_speier_already_an_embar.html Sun, 13 Apr 2008 07:49:50 +0000